[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Barry A. Warsaw) writes: > If what you say is the case -- builtin support isn't terribly useful > without the shared whitelist -- then maybe it does make sense to > defer until a later Mailman version.
Some users will not want to use a shared whitelist, but in my experience, the vast majority will. I predict that if you add the feature without this sub-feature, it will become a nagging FAQ. Think about a site with 1000 mailing lists. User jdoe is subscribed to 2 of these lists, but over time starts posting to others. He'll get very tired of confirming his message upwards of 998 times. And this assumes he only uses a single e-mail address. It's also more difficult from a management perspective. Instead of having one data-store to prune, you have 1000. I can't actually think of a good reason why you'd ever NOT want to utilize a shared whitelist. The goal is to keep spammers out, not to impede legitimate senders. In a perfect universe, you'd have a global whitelist containing the address of every non-spammer on the planet. :-) -- (http://tmda.net/) _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman-21/listinfo/mailman-developers
